“... a Bodhisattva is not born into an inferior family (hīna-kula), like a family of caṇḍālas, flute makers (veṇu-kāra), cartwrights (ratha-kāra), or servants (puṣkasa). A Bodhisattva is only born into one of two families—a Brāhmaṇa family or a Kṣatriya family. When the Brāhmaṇa families are dominant in the world, the Bodhisattva is born into a Brāhmaṇa family. When the Kṣatriya families are dominant in the world, the Bodhisattva is born into a Kṣatriya family. Thus, monks, at this time the Kṣatriya families were dominant in the world, so Bodhisattvas were born into such families.”
This is written in the 3rd Chapter of the brilliant & beautiful Buddhist text, Lalita-Vistāra.
The hatred for “Brahmins” runs so deep, that it is the fundamental cause of all distortions & misrepresentations & frauds perpetrated about India.
Trust me, the problem is not “Indians” or “Hindus” per se – it is the “Brahmins”.
They are the thorn in everyone’s flesh.
The prejudice against them is so enormous that it has led to a considerable misrepresentation of Buddhism too.
If you go through the history of Buddhism, all of the greatest & most important Buddhist philosophers were either Brāhmaṇas or Kṣatriyas, or both, but this fact is strenusously hidden or glossed over, in modern times.
I have my doubts about so-called Buddhist opposition to the caste-system, and the claims about its alleged egalitarianism.
I do not think Buddhism was “initially” anti-
The Buddhist denouncement of “Brahmins” is the later phenomenon – but I am no official, formally-trained scholar to “prove” it – {though I may just make a substantial case, over a period of time} – and I don’t think the facts of the case have ever been made known to the public.
This is another passage, from the same text, the Lalita-Vistāra:
“The Brāhmaṇas’ mantras and the treatises of the Vedas (veda śāstra)
It should be in the form of an excellent, great elephant with 6 tusks, covered with golden netting.
Its head should be very red & exceedingly handsome.
It should ooze fragrant fluids from its temples & have a glorious body.
Someone who is learned in the Vedas and scriptures of the Brāhmaṇas (brāhmaṇa-veda-ś
That is, the Bodhisattva who goes on to become Gautama Buddha.
The first quoted passage clearly proves that there was no ill-feeling, no rebellion in the modern sense of the term, no outright rejection, of the caste-system.
The Buddhists very much recognized & accepted it: in this text, they positively uphold it.
The second passage shows that the Buddhists were not inimical to the Vedas, or the Shāstras.
How could Buddhism found itself on the authority of the brāhmaṇā-mantras & veda-śā
The whole history of Buddhism seems to have been confused, probably in the last one millennium.
At what point did Buddhism actually “revolt” against the “Brahmins”?
I did not see it in the first 14 Cantos of the Lalita-Vistāra.
I did not see it in the Buddha-Carita.
I didn’t see it in the Rock Edicts of Ashoka.
Obviously, the philosophy of Buddha is very different from that of what could be called “mainstream” Brahmanical philosophy {if there ever was such a thing} – but there is no hatred for, no anger against, and no overt criticism of, Brāhmaṇas in any of these early texts.
Disagreement & dissent does not take the form of intense disrespect.
There are no insinuations & allegations made against Brāhmaṇas.
Buddha doesn’t accept the violent sacrifices – he doesn’t accept the extreme austerities practised by ascetics of his times – and he doesn’t accept the higher schools of philosophy.
But the “Brahmins” themselves are neither hated nor criticized.
So for instance, he rejects the Sānkhya philosophy.
What does this amount to?
Even the Vedantists reject Sānkhya.
Shankarāchārya also rejects Sānkhya.
It is one of the most prestigious schools of philosophy of Ancient India, but it is one of the 6 major schools, and, in the ultimate analysis, is NOT the representative Brahmanical or Indian-Hindu philosophy of life.
And while Buddha rejects Sānkhya as well as the rites & sacrifices involving violence to living creatures, Sānkhya itself rejects many such rites & sacrifices of those times, and this is amply articulated in the Mahābhārata.
A man could follow Sānkhya & reject animal-sacrifice.
He could be reject Sānkhya & follow animal-sacrifice.
Or he could reject both Sānkhya & animal-sacrifice.
The Mahābhārata repeatedly articulates the growing inner conflict amongst Indians of those times, and the mounting unease with animal-sacrifice, which has nothing to do with Buddhism, because they are mentioned nowhere in the text.
Basically, reality isn’t as easy & simplistic as it is made out to be, in contemporary propaganda.
The Brāhmaṇas apparently had several different & somewhat conflicting philosophies & practices – there was an astonishing freedom of thought in Ancient India – so they are never directly attacked in these Buddhist texts.
In the Lalita-Vistāra, it is the Brāhmaṇas who are consulted, when the King Shuddhodana wants to understand the meaning of Queen Māyā’s dream.
It is the Brāhmaṇas who tell the King & Queen that their son will either be a Chakravartin or a Buddha.
It is the Brāhmaṇas who have knowledge of who is a Bodhisattva, and how is he going to appear.
And the appearance of the Bodhisattva is based on the Veda-Śāstras!
After which we read (Chapter 6):
“Bhikṣus, when King Śuddhodana heard that message from the Brāhmaṇas who understood how to analyze marks & signs & who knew the scriptures related to dreams
(lakṣaṇanaimittikavaipañcakebh
he was satisfied.
Impressed, delighted, & joyful, he felt blissful & happy.
He pleased the Brāhmaṇas by offering them delicious food & drink.
When they were all full, he entertained them & presented them with gifts before they departed
At the same time, as an offering to the Bodhisattva, alms were distributed at the four gates of the city of Kapilavastu & at all its crossroads & junctions.
The king offered
· food to those who were hungry, and
· drink to those who were thirsty.
He offered
· clothes to those who needed clothing,
· carriages to those who required transportation,
· perfumes to those who desired perfume,
· garlands to those who wished for garlands,
· oils to those who wanted ointments,
· sheets to those who longed for bedding,
· shelter to the homeless, and
· necessities to those who yearned for provisions.”
So much for the hatred of Bodhisattva-Buddhas for Brāhmaṇas, and so much for the absence of “pity” in pagan cultures!
